*laughs* Oh LaserDiscs. It's okay I still buy vhs tapes all the time because there is so much out there not yet on dvd that I love (even though I just found a childhood movie in a really poor quality dvd but it's better than nothing).
That's good that either player is backwards compatible. Now I feel I don't have anything to worry about until the next big thing comes out. It does seem like blu ray has won the high def war. Disney had a huge part in that I feel. I remember there was a best buy ad that came out a few weeks ago that compared the two (it talked about their +'s and -'s) and it made blu ray sound 10 times better than hd dvd. The ad was very biased.
Thanks for filling me in guys. ^.^
Blu-Ray has won the Hi-Def war!
With the two hi-def discs, there's no question the visual quality is identical for well-coded movies. Both HD-DVD and Blu-ray output 1080p video.
Where it starts to get tricky is with audio and storage capacity.
With over 20GB additional real estate to work with, there is no question that Blu-Ray comes out ahead of HD-DVD. It may seem like that 20GB advantage over HD-DVD's 30GB (dual layer format) is no big deal but the 30GB limit has already been hit by at least one HD-DVD film: Transformers.
It was reported on TheDigitalBits.com that Paramount wanted to put an additional audio track and at least one additional special feature on the HD-DVD release of Transformers but that these items had to be cut out because there wasn't enough space on a dual-layer HD-DVD to put them on!
Now don't think for a minute that there haven't been multi-disc releases of Blu-Ray and HD-DVD yet, but we're talking specifically one film, and a film that isn't old enough (or regard well enough by most people) to be an acknowledged classic like Blade Runner or Close Encounters of the Third Kind. Of course Paramount didn't want to spend that kind of extra money on Optimus Prime so they left those features off of the Transformers HD-DVD instead of putting an extra disc in the movie casing.
Had Paramount been backing Blu-Ray at the time of Transformers' home video release, all the extra features left off the HD-DVD would have fit comfortably with probable room-to-spare on a Blu-Ray disc. That's the allegation that's been made at any rate.
So see, besides the additional Hollywood studio backing, Blu-Ray makes a lot more sense than HD-DVD in the long run because it has more room to grow and a higher-bandwidth capacity to boot.
Ah well, all those points are moot now since the writing's clearly on the wall for HD-DVD...
Where it starts to get tricky is with audio and storage capacity.
With over 20GB additional real estate to work with, there is no question that Blu-Ray comes out ahead of HD-DVD. It may seem like that 20GB advantage over HD-DVD's 30GB (dual layer format) is no big deal but the 30GB limit has already been hit by at least one HD-DVD film: Transformers.
It was reported on TheDigitalBits.com that Paramount wanted to put an additional audio track and at least one additional special feature on the HD-DVD release of Transformers but that these items had to be cut out because there wasn't enough space on a dual-layer HD-DVD to put them on!
Now don't think for a minute that there haven't been multi-disc releases of Blu-Ray and HD-DVD yet, but we're talking specifically one film, and a film that isn't old enough (or regard well enough by most people) to be an acknowledged classic like Blade Runner or Close Encounters of the Third Kind. Of course Paramount didn't want to spend that kind of extra money on Optimus Prime so they left those features off of the Transformers HD-DVD instead of putting an extra disc in the movie casing.
Had Paramount been backing Blu-Ray at the time of Transformers' home video release, all the extra features left off the HD-DVD would have fit comfortably with probable room-to-spare on a Blu-Ray disc. That's the allegation that's been made at any rate.
So see, besides the additional Hollywood studio backing, Blu-Ray makes a lot more sense than HD-DVD in the long run because it has more room to grow and a higher-bandwidth capacity to boot.
Ah well, all those points are moot now since the writing's clearly on the wall for HD-DVD...
-
- AV Founder
- Posts: 7389
- Joined: October 23rd, 2004
- Location: SaskaTOON, Canada
Actually, that Transformers argument is totally bogus. Someone started an urban legend and it won't stop.
Transformers DID have 2 discs on HD DVD, and the first disc basically only carried the movie and not much else. Then consider that Batman Begins had only ONE HD DVD disc, and that it included terrific video, a picture-in-picture commentary, and tons of bonus features, PLUS a lossless TrueHD soundtrack. Warners managed it just fine on one of their first HD DVDs. Transformers could have easily carried TrueHD on its movie-only disc. Paramount simply chose not to. It's just not an audio option they tend to support. And many have said that most couldn't tell the difference between lossless and lossy anyways, at least without spending a load of money on the best equipment. But the main point is that TrueHD could have been there on HDDVD and Paramount just chose not to do it.
Transformers DID have 2 discs on HD DVD, and the first disc basically only carried the movie and not much else. Then consider that Batman Begins had only ONE HD DVD disc, and that it included terrific video, a picture-in-picture commentary, and tons of bonus features, PLUS a lossless TrueHD soundtrack. Warners managed it just fine on one of their first HD DVDs. Transformers could have easily carried TrueHD on its movie-only disc. Paramount simply chose not to. It's just not an audio option they tend to support. And many have said that most couldn't tell the difference between lossless and lossy anyways, at least without spending a load of money on the best equipment. But the main point is that TrueHD could have been there on HDDVD and Paramount just chose not to do it.
-
- AV Forum Member
- Posts: 5207
- Joined: September 27th, 2007
Um...The "someone" was a website reviewer--and a pro-HD site, at that--quoting one of Paramount's own reps at a Q&A appearance:Randall wrote:Actually, that Transformers argument is totally bogus. Someone started an urban legend and it won't stop.
http://hddvd.highdefdigest.com/1110/transformers.html
---
Indeed, I had the opportunity to attend a special 'Transformers' media event with Paramount late last week, and the question was asked almost immediately -- why no Dolby TrueHD or uncompressed PCM? The studio's answer was that due to space limitations on the disc, the decision was made to limit the audio to Dolby Digital-Plus 5.1 Surround only (here at 1.5mbps). Unfortunately, this confirms the long-held theory that the 30Gb capacity of an HD-30 dual-layer HD DVD disc has forced studios to choose between offering a robust supplements package (as they've done here) and the very best in audio quality.
----
In the same sense as they "uh, meant to leave it off, yeah...".But the main point is that TrueHD could have been there on HDDVD and Paramount just chose not to do it.
-
- AV Founder
- Posts: 8279
- Joined: October 16th, 2004
- Location: Orlando
- Contact:
The argument is still valid. A better example might be the Harry Potter 5 discs.
On the BD all the bonus features are in high-def. The BD also includes a 44-minute TV special that was left off the HD DVD.
On the HD DVD version all but one of the bonus features is in standard def.
On the BD the audio is uncompressed PCM.
On the HD DVD the audio is Dolby TrueHD (not a massive difference there, except in disc space which is what we're discussing).
The BD has Dolby Digital 5.1 tracks in English, Japanese, Danish, Dutch, German, Italian, Swedish, Flemmish, Catalan, French, and Spanish. It also contains subtitles in English, Dutch, Danish, Finnish, Norwegian, Catalan, Korean, German, Italian, Swedish, French, Spanish, Chinese, Japanese.
The HD DVD version only has English, French and Spanish tracks and subtitles.
The HD DVD does have some downloadable web content, pop up trivia, and a PIP feature with kids from the movie commenting on occasional scenes that the BD does not have. But those are features that could have been put on the Blu-ray version if they chose - they weren't left off for space reasons.
Overall I think it's obvious how having that extra space available is much more desirable than not having it.
On the BD all the bonus features are in high-def. The BD also includes a 44-minute TV special that was left off the HD DVD.
On the HD DVD version all but one of the bonus features is in standard def.
On the BD the audio is uncompressed PCM.
On the HD DVD the audio is Dolby TrueHD (not a massive difference there, except in disc space which is what we're discussing).
The BD has Dolby Digital 5.1 tracks in English, Japanese, Danish, Dutch, German, Italian, Swedish, Flemmish, Catalan, French, and Spanish. It also contains subtitles in English, Dutch, Danish, Finnish, Norwegian, Catalan, Korean, German, Italian, Swedish, French, Spanish, Chinese, Japanese.
The HD DVD version only has English, French and Spanish tracks and subtitles.
The HD DVD does have some downloadable web content, pop up trivia, and a PIP feature with kids from the movie commenting on occasional scenes that the BD does not have. But those are features that could have been put on the Blu-ray version if they chose - they weren't left off for space reasons.
Overall I think it's obvious how having that extra space available is much more desirable than not having it.
-
- AV Founder
- Posts: 7389
- Joined: October 23rd, 2004
- Location: SaskaTOON, Canada
Yes, HP5 is a much better argument. It is obvious that greater space can make a difference. It just wasn't an issue with Transformers, especially with a whole second disc to use, no matter what one Paramount lackey says.
And hidefdigest is not necessarily pro-HD DVD. They are pro-HD, period. I go there every day and quite enjoy the site. And, by the way Eric, I'm a website reviewer, too, and I own both HD formats. I read the same Transformers review when it was published, and I found the info just as suspect a I do now. The Paramount rep spoke wrongly. If Batman Begins could include True HD, so could Transformers--- their runtime is only 3 minutes difference, after all.
So why does Warner add TrueHD but not Paramount? Good question.
And hidefdigest is not necessarily pro-HD DVD. They are pro-HD, period. I go there every day and quite enjoy the site. And, by the way Eric, I'm a website reviewer, too, and I own both HD formats. I read the same Transformers review when it was published, and I found the info just as suspect a I do now. The Paramount rep spoke wrongly. If Batman Begins could include True HD, so could Transformers--- their runtime is only 3 minutes difference, after all.
So why does Warner add TrueHD but not Paramount? Good question.
Paramount's notoriously cheap on videos.
They generally don't go all out on their DVDs.
For years, the biggest "extras" they put on their DVD releases were anamorphic video and trailers.
Big deal -- every studio does that!
BUT, the types of extras people take for granted with some of the better Warners' releases -- short subjects, appropriate period animated shorts, documentaries, restored picture and audio -- are still rare on Viacom/Paramount releases.
The sadder part of the Paramount release schedule is that they're still ignoring so many of their older pre-1970s work and there's been nothing animated released by Viacom/Paramount that's pre-Nickelodeon.
To be fair though, early WB HD releases were just regurgitating the same extras as the DVD counterparts with the extras in standard definition, too.
They generally don't go all out on their DVDs.
For years, the biggest "extras" they put on their DVD releases were anamorphic video and trailers.
Big deal -- every studio does that!
BUT, the types of extras people take for granted with some of the better Warners' releases -- short subjects, appropriate period animated shorts, documentaries, restored picture and audio -- are still rare on Viacom/Paramount releases.
The sadder part of the Paramount release schedule is that they're still ignoring so many of their older pre-1970s work and there's been nothing animated released by Viacom/Paramount that's pre-Nickelodeon.
To be fair though, early WB HD releases were just regurgitating the same extras as the DVD counterparts with the extras in standard definition, too.
In SPITE of HD, stick to DVD for some things...
The disappointing reality of HD releases is that many of them lack the special features of present-DVD releases.
Examples -- Spider-Man 1 and 2 on Blu-Ray have only the video in 1080p as the "big bonus" and reviews have been savage on the uneven and barely better than DVD quality of the video. Most reviews recommend not even bothering to upgrade to BR for either of these two films. As of yet, neither is available on BR outside of the Spider-Man trilogy boxset. Spider-Man 3 is, however, commended for superb video quality and having all or most of the DVD extras in high-definition.
The Robocop and Terminator 1 and 2 Blu-Rays are completely lacking the features of the 20th Anniversary Robocop DVD release and the past Terminator 1 Special Edition DVD and Terminator 2 Ultimate and Extreme Edition DVDs.
Superman: The Movie BR lacks the original theatrical cut and the new extras (including the Fleischer Superman cartoons) which are available on the 2006 4-disc Superman: The Movie DVD release. The BR release of Superman: The Movie is basically a port of the 2001 Superman: The Movie DVD with its short list of extras.
There are other examples of HD releases sorely lacking in features compared to standard-def DVDs but these are some of the bigger films that should have had decent extras in the BR releases, too.
Another important reality of HD to consider is that it really won't make a poor looking film or made-for-standard-def TV series look any better, too. Most TV shows really weren't made for hi-def video and will, if anything, look worse in hi-def than standard def. For many people, the hi-def revamp of Star Trek has been a bust with uneven reimagined special effects and higher-resolution video that just points out the seams in Nimoy's ears and the cardboard sets all that much clearer...!
There are also many animated TV series made over the past 40 years with such flat, simple color palettes and lack of detailed flourishes that there's really no point in doing a hi-def release of those, either. Does anybody really believe that PowerPuff Girls or Smurfs would benefit from HD?
If any animation would benefit from HD, it would be theatrical shorts from the 1930s-1950s which are full of subtle details lost in standard-def releases as well as the classic Disney animated features.
Examples -- Spider-Man 1 and 2 on Blu-Ray have only the video in 1080p as the "big bonus" and reviews have been savage on the uneven and barely better than DVD quality of the video. Most reviews recommend not even bothering to upgrade to BR for either of these two films. As of yet, neither is available on BR outside of the Spider-Man trilogy boxset. Spider-Man 3 is, however, commended for superb video quality and having all or most of the DVD extras in high-definition.
The Robocop and Terminator 1 and 2 Blu-Rays are completely lacking the features of the 20th Anniversary Robocop DVD release and the past Terminator 1 Special Edition DVD and Terminator 2 Ultimate and Extreme Edition DVDs.
Superman: The Movie BR lacks the original theatrical cut and the new extras (including the Fleischer Superman cartoons) which are available on the 2006 4-disc Superman: The Movie DVD release. The BR release of Superman: The Movie is basically a port of the 2001 Superman: The Movie DVD with its short list of extras.
There are other examples of HD releases sorely lacking in features compared to standard-def DVDs but these are some of the bigger films that should have had decent extras in the BR releases, too.
Another important reality of HD to consider is that it really won't make a poor looking film or made-for-standard-def TV series look any better, too. Most TV shows really weren't made for hi-def video and will, if anything, look worse in hi-def than standard def. For many people, the hi-def revamp of Star Trek has been a bust with uneven reimagined special effects and higher-resolution video that just points out the seams in Nimoy's ears and the cardboard sets all that much clearer...!
There are also many animated TV series made over the past 40 years with such flat, simple color palettes and lack of detailed flourishes that there's really no point in doing a hi-def release of those, either. Does anybody really believe that PowerPuff Girls or Smurfs would benefit from HD?
If any animation would benefit from HD, it would be theatrical shorts from the 1930s-1950s which are full of subtle details lost in standard-def releases as well as the classic Disney animated features.
-
- AV Forum Member
- Posts: 1960
- Joined: December 16th, 2004
- Location: Burbank, Calif.
I think that's a big reason that Sleeping Beauty is going to be first 'traditional' Disney animated feature to be released in hi-def; since it was filmed in 70mm, it should look especially gorgeous.
-----------
But you're right, GeorgeC .. not everything will benefit from, or would even 'need' to be released, in a hi-definition format (especially most TV shows; even DVD showcases these in a higher resolution than their original broadcast .. wires and similar 'tricks' which used to be hidden by NTSC broadcast 'noise' are often clearly visible).
Like Ben (and a few others here), I still have quite a few titles on Laserdisc which either aren't available on DVD, or which I didn't feel were even necessary to 'upgrade' from LD to DVD.
Personally, I'm looking to Blu-Ray as a 'showcase' format for select titles which are worthy of large-screen presentation. The bulk of my collection will remain in standard-def DVD's and LD's, which mostly get watched on smaller screens, anyway.
-----------
But you're right, GeorgeC .. not everything will benefit from, or would even 'need' to be released, in a hi-definition format (especially most TV shows; even DVD showcases these in a higher resolution than their original broadcast .. wires and similar 'tricks' which used to be hidden by NTSC broadcast 'noise' are often clearly visible).
Like Ben (and a few others here), I still have quite a few titles on Laserdisc which either aren't available on DVD, or which I didn't feel were even necessary to 'upgrade' from LD to DVD.
Personally, I'm looking to Blu-Ray as a 'showcase' format for select titles which are worthy of large-screen presentation. The bulk of my collection will remain in standard-def DVD's and LD's, which mostly get watched on smaller screens, anyway.
-
- AV Founder
- Posts: 25715
- Joined: October 22nd, 2004
- Location: London, UK
Yep...I've merged, since George's comments follow on from my last message in this here thread.
Buying factors include: how good the movie is, the likely quality over DVD, bonus features and, simply, how often the darn thing is likely to be watched. No use jumping up to a hi-def version of a title I already have but gets scant play time.
Exactly my take on things too. Out of my hundreds if not thousands (don't worry, we're talking low numbers!) of discs, at the moment I'm looking at maybe going Blu-Ray on less than 30 upgrades.droosan wrote:Personally, I'm looking to Blu-Ray as a 'showcase' format for select titles which are worthy of large-screen presentation. The bulk of my collection will remain in standard-def DVD's and LD's, which mostly get watched on smaller screens, anyway.
Buying factors include: how good the movie is, the likely quality over DVD, bonus features and, simply, how often the darn thing is likely to be watched. No use jumping up to a hi-def version of a title I already have but gets scant play time.
Adding fuel to the fire and WHY a PS3 may be your best choice for a first-buy Blu-Ray player...
From theDigitalBits.com , 01-15-08, specifically http://www.thedigitalbits.com/#com
"..some current Blu-ray Disc players won't be able to play all the features on future Blu-ray Disc releases. This isn't really news, as it's been widely known for months now. It's true that many current stand-alone Blu-ray Disc players are not BD profile 1.1 or 2.0 compatible. All new players sold as of last November MUST be profile 1.1 ready. Stand-alone profile 2.0 players will be available in the next few months, beginning with Panasonic's BD-50. By the end of 2008, virtually all new Blu-ray players should be 2.0 compatible, and the issue will resolve itself. However, by far the largest base of Blu-ray Disc players currently in the hands of consumers is ALREADY future-proof... Sony's PlayStation 3. It's already been firmware updated to profile 1.1 compatibility, and it features a built-in Internet connection, making it ready for a future profile 2.0 firmware update as well (which Sony has confirmed is coming). As to the fact that some existing players aren't 1.1 and 2.0 ready, it's unfortunate. But it should be pointed out that both HD-DVD and Blu-ray were rushed to market because of the format war before they were ready. Anyone who was there at the beginning two years ago will recall that both formats have had plenty of technical issues to deal with. But let's put this into context. Anyone who was there are the beginning of DVD will recall similar issues. People who purchased the first DVD players weren't able to access the DTS audio on many DVDs a couple years later without buying a new player. Many early adopters also needed new players to take advantage of DVDs with RSDL layer switches and seamless branching. It's just part of the reality of being an early adopter that when you're among the first to buy any technology..."
So, a $400 PS3 40GB (American price) is your cheapest Blu-Ray alternative. Of course, it doesn't come with HDMI cables or a remote. Those will only set you back another $50 at least...!
From theDigitalBits.com , 01-15-08, specifically http://www.thedigitalbits.com/#com
"..some current Blu-ray Disc players won't be able to play all the features on future Blu-ray Disc releases. This isn't really news, as it's been widely known for months now. It's true that many current stand-alone Blu-ray Disc players are not BD profile 1.1 or 2.0 compatible. All new players sold as of last November MUST be profile 1.1 ready. Stand-alone profile 2.0 players will be available in the next few months, beginning with Panasonic's BD-50. By the end of 2008, virtually all new Blu-ray players should be 2.0 compatible, and the issue will resolve itself. However, by far the largest base of Blu-ray Disc players currently in the hands of consumers is ALREADY future-proof... Sony's PlayStation 3. It's already been firmware updated to profile 1.1 compatibility, and it features a built-in Internet connection, making it ready for a future profile 2.0 firmware update as well (which Sony has confirmed is coming). As to the fact that some existing players aren't 1.1 and 2.0 ready, it's unfortunate. But it should be pointed out that both HD-DVD and Blu-ray were rushed to market because of the format war before they were ready. Anyone who was there at the beginning two years ago will recall that both formats have had plenty of technical issues to deal with. But let's put this into context. Anyone who was there are the beginning of DVD will recall similar issues. People who purchased the first DVD players weren't able to access the DTS audio on many DVDs a couple years later without buying a new player. Many early adopters also needed new players to take advantage of DVDs with RSDL layer switches and seamless branching. It's just part of the reality of being an early adopter that when you're among the first to buy any technology..."
So, a $400 PS3 40GB (American price) is your cheapest Blu-Ray alternative. Of course, it doesn't come with HDMI cables or a remote. Those will only set you back another $50 at least...!
-
- AV Forum Member
- Posts: 1960
- Joined: December 16th, 2004
- Location: Burbank, Calif.
I haven't yet bothered to connect my PS3 to the internet .. but then again, I haven't had any problem with playing any of the 9 Blu-Ray discs I own. It's nice to know that I can 'upgrade' the PS3's firmware at a future time (if/when needed), though! 
--------
And, yeah; PS3: ~US$400 .. PS3 remote/HDMI cables: ~US$50 (at least) .. AND, HDTV: ~US$1000+ for a decent-quality, large-sized screen (but getting cheaper all the time) .. so, it's still a major investment that can be upwards of '2 grand' if you're buying into Blu-Ray 'cold'.
It remains to be seen whether Blu-Ray will break-out of the 'single-percentage-point' share it currently holds in the overall home-video market to become the 'next big thing'; or whether it has 'won' the HD format war, only to emerge as the new 'Laserdisc' (i.e., the choice of cinephiles and home-theatre enthusiasts), with DVD being the new 'VHS' (the 'popular' format, which is considered to be 'good enough' by a solid majority of the buying public).
Many folks forget that Laserdisc also initially 'duked-it-out' with a competing 12-inch video disc format: RCA Select-A-Vision (aka CED, Capacitance Electronic Disc). Despite quickly defeating this opponent, however, Laserdisc never broke-out of its 'elite' niche status .. but it did manage to hang-on for 15 years or so, producing a very impressive library of several ten-thousands of titles. If Blu can manage even ¼ as much, I wouldn't be disappointed.
--------
And, yeah; PS3: ~US$400 .. PS3 remote/HDMI cables: ~US$50 (at least) .. AND, HDTV: ~US$1000+ for a decent-quality, large-sized screen (but getting cheaper all the time) .. so, it's still a major investment that can be upwards of '2 grand' if you're buying into Blu-Ray 'cold'.
It remains to be seen whether Blu-Ray will break-out of the 'single-percentage-point' share it currently holds in the overall home-video market to become the 'next big thing'; or whether it has 'won' the HD format war, only to emerge as the new 'Laserdisc' (i.e., the choice of cinephiles and home-theatre enthusiasts), with DVD being the new 'VHS' (the 'popular' format, which is considered to be 'good enough' by a solid majority of the buying public).
Many folks forget that Laserdisc also initially 'duked-it-out' with a competing 12-inch video disc format: RCA Select-A-Vision (aka CED, Capacitance Electronic Disc). Despite quickly defeating this opponent, however, Laserdisc never broke-out of its 'elite' niche status .. but it did manage to hang-on for 15 years or so, producing a very impressive library of several ten-thousands of titles. If Blu can manage even ¼ as much, I wouldn't be disappointed.
-
- AV Founder
- Posts: 25715
- Joined: October 22nd, 2004
- Location: London, UK